In cinematic, story-driven cutscenes, however, the differences between detail levels are immediately apparent, as Lara almost-always takes key billing, with lots of close-ups and action moves highlighting the immersion-damaging loss of hairs. In the normal gameplay position, with Lara away from the camera, the difference between detail levels is far less noticeable, though as Lara walks, runs and jumps, the degree of hair movement and its realism are still affected. In Shadow of the Tomb Raider, the 'Normal' setting is recommended for just about everyone, as 'Low' strips back the number of hairs for min-spec users who need to disable and turn down as many settings as possible. These hairs move realistically, can be affected by wind and water, and are lit and shaded in real-time by the scene. PureHair is Crystal Dynamics and Square Enix's hair rendering technology, which like our own HairWorks technique adds tens of thousands of hair strands to a character model. I always thought that animation would have been perfect for Star Wars. I think they made a few based on Resident Evil and Final Fantasy in the last 10 years and release alongside a few shitty games. Sadly, it seems that kind of CGI animation is only made for cheap videogame movies now. It was 'Dredd' before 'Dredd' was 'Dredd.' An awesome movie that was horribly marketed, hated by critics, ignored by general audiences, and flopped hard at the box office. Its not the 'best' movie of that year, but the movie I enjoyed watching the most. I'm probably the only person that considers this their favorite movie of 2001. They should have made the CGI, Japanese influence, and stellar voice-cast the focal points of the marketing. If it was marketed as a Science Fiction movie, simply titled 'The Spirits Within,' it would have been far better received by general audiences. Critics slammed it because it because they thought it was based on a videogame, and fans of the video game series hated it because it wasn't based on any of them. The problem for it was the 'Final Fantasy' label. The creators boasted about the CGI effects and the 60,000 strands of hair on their main character Aki Ross, who for a fictional character even managed the bizarre feat of making it into Maxim’s top 100 in 2001.įor its time, it was a breathtakingly gorgeous movie, and it still holds up. There was even a scare as a small band of actors become worried that “computer actors” could replace them. The photo realistic detail was so amazing that if you didn't know this was computer generated you could almost mistake some (mostly close up) scenes for the real thing. While Toy Story set the standard back in 1995 as the first entirely computer generated feature film, this was the first go with humans as lead characters. “We did end up spending more than what we planned,” said producer Aida, “but it’s not by any means a massive number compared to what other major studios have spent on similar features,” The Honolulu studio itself was believed to have used up $40 - $45 million of the budget.Ī teaser trailer debuted about a year before the film opened, and during the run up to release the buzz was hot, with the unique selling point being the highly detailed, computer generated look. Originally budgeted at $70 million, it spiralled out to $137 million. The intention was to create a Final Fantasy movie, and other projects should it prove successful. Video games company Square initially set up Square Pictures, a studio in Honolulu, Hawaii, back in 1997.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |